Minneapolis emerges as a middle-tier mass transit role model while seven major US cities provide less than one eighth of their populations with “frequent transit” options.

Many US cities are failing to connect people to jobs through mass transit, according to our new report that uses census and employment data to establish 12 new benchmarks for how mass transit systems serve urban populations. More than one third of the US cities surveyed—all with significant climate change risk—have grown without developing any substantial mass transit systems to serve their populations.

The new report, Indicators for Sustainable Mobility, defines criteria to evaluate mass transportation systems and then uses the criteria to assess 20 cities in the US and compare the scores to those of eight cities in Canada and Mexico.

“We know what happens when cities grow without a solid plan for transport, because we’re seeing it now in some of the fastest-growing cities of both the Global South and southern US,” said Joe Chestnut, author of the ITDP report. “Without alternatives, middle-class wage earners become increasingly dependent on their cars, spending more and more time stuck in traffic, and less wealthy communities simply lose access to the city.”

Metrobus in the Centro Historico of Mexico City.

Compared to major cities in Canada and Mexico, US cities, on average, lag in terms of transit access, speed, comfort and access to destinations. Toronto and Vancouver join Chicago and New York City as the only cities serving more than 85 percent of their populations with frequent transit.

Minneapolis also emerged as one of the best cities for mass transit, with 74 percent of its population, 89 percent of all jobs, and 84 percent of all low-income households all within a 500-meter walk or a 10-minute bike ride of frequent transit. Boston, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, Seattle, and Washington, D.C., were the only other US cities serving more than 70 percent of their populations, jobs, and low-income households with frequent transit.

More cities sat at the opposite end of the spectrum, however, with some of the fastest growing metropolitan areas relying almost exclusively on automobile traffic as the sole transportation option. Memphis stood out in this regard, with less than 10 percent of all jobs, 2 percent of all low-income households, and 2 percent of people overall within a 500-meter walk or a 10-minute bike ride of frequent transit. Nashville and San Antonio also served less than one quarter of all jobs, and less than one tenth of all low-income households and people overall served by frequent transit.

The report found many ways in which low-income populations were just as poorly served by transit as other communities, even though their needs are greater. ITDP measured low-income households near rapid transit as the percentage of the population that makes less than $20,000 a year that is located within about a 10-minute bike ride or walk of a rapid transit station. The report found that, although there is not a major difference in terms of proximity to transit, there is a lack of access to jobs that don’t require a high school education with a 30- or 60-minute commute, putting them out of reach of the people who most need them.

“In the US, there is a narrative that if people work hard, then they can get out of poverty, but we’ve built cities that make this narrative impossible,” said Chestnut. “For households making less than $20,000 per year, reliable cars are a pipe dream: a huge expense that they can’t afford. Without adequate transit, they will remain stuck in place.”

Benchmarking Success in Mass Transportation

The ITDP report found that the high-performing cities all focused on keeping mass transit frequent, rapid and accessible:

Frequent—A bus or train every 12 minutes or less from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Increasing transit frequency is the single most important thing cities can do to increase transit ridership. It may not be sufficient alone, but it is the single most important predictor of transit use.

Rapid—Slow-moving buses stuck in traffic are not an appealing option. In addition to frequency, transit needs to have priority on streets—a dedicated tram or busway, off-board fare collection and all-door boarding are some of the features that make transit rapid.

Access to Destinations—You can’t take transit if it doesn’t go where you need to go. At a minimum, it needs to take you between home and work, but should also offer options for mobility overall—changing jobs, moving houses, taking children to school, shopping, health care. This is measured by a host of indicators: everything from people’s daily access to transport, to jobs located near transit, to cycling infrastructure, to city characteristics such as block density, which makes for a more walkable environment.

ITDP’s analysis revealed that good biking infrastructure improves access to frequent transit. Protected bike lanes are an inexpensive way for cities to increase the number of people using frequent transit lines, often solving the “first-last mile” problem. On average, bike lanes increased access to frequent transit by 2.5 percent or about 21,000 people per city.

The researchers also found that the more access people have to transit and jobs, the more they tend to use transit. Those cities with higher transit mode share also tended to have high-capacity transit corridors, such as major arteries that cut through the city center, with dedicated lanes for buses, as well as metro or light rail. Lower transit mode share would include islands of coverage, such as a park-and-ride cluster in certain areas, requiring most people to drive at least part of the trip.

Interestingly, Los Angeles—famous for its gridlock and smog—placed in the middle of the pack, serving 45 percent of its population, 59 percent of jobs, and 57 percent of low-income households with frequent transit.

“Climate change is forcing a rethink of urban development principles across the US, and provide more transport options. Cities are doing that are seeing some really positive results, while cities that cling to the “cars only” model are falling behind,” added ITDP’s Chestnut. “In creating universal benchmarks, we can see how cities like Los Angeles, Seattle, and Minneapolis have made tremendous strides in improving access without cars. These cities are healthier and more equitable places to live because of these improvements.”

Minneapolis Stands Out

Minneapolis Metro Transit Green Line Light Rail

While the overall picture of transport access is dim, the city of Minneapolis stood out as a role model. Although a much smaller city, Minneapolis is close to Washington, DC, in terms of transit ridership percentage and Frequent Transit, and rivals Boston and Philadelphia in terms of block density, a key indicator of a quality walking environment.

Minneapolis’ success is partly due to smart policies around an ambitious plan for transit-oriented development, Minneapolis 2040. This includes investing in a quality bike network, a system of off-street trails that the city is building on to create 35 miles of protected bikeways. Minneapolis significantly increased access to cycling and transit, growing the percentage of people living near frequent transit (PNFT) from 64 percent to 73 percent. This was the largest increase among all the cities that ITDP evaluated, and the city’s scores were comparable to larger coastal cities like Boston and Seattle. In contrast, Dallas––a much larger city with a limited frequent transit network––serves only 41 percent of all jobs, 14 percent of all low-income households, and 11 percent of all people overall within a 500-meter walk or a 10-minute bike ride of frequent transit.

“Minneapolis has very intentionally tied transportation and land use decisions together in policy, focusing growth near transit and prioritizing infrastructure improvements in growing parts of the city,” says Lisa Bender, president of the Minneapolis City Council. “We have made very specific commitments to using public transportation investments to advance city goals supporting race equity and fighting climate change.”

Fortaleza has shown the impact that small, low-cost interventions can have on quality of life. Pedestrian improvements such as this raised crosswalk massively improve pedestrian safety and access to the streets. Photo: Fortaleza City Hall

by Clarisse Cunha Linke, ITDP Brazil

The capital of Ceará sees traffic fatalities drop to the lowest level in 15 years after creating a mobility strategy with speed reduction interventions, priority bus lanes, and cycling infrastructure.

With 2.6 million inhabitants and rapidly growing, Fortaleza is Brazil’s fifth largest city and fourth most popular tourist destination. From 2010 to 2015, the city’s fleet of vehicles increased by 40%, while the population grew only by 5.7%. Motorbikes increased three times more than cars. The city had massive congestion and one of the highest death tolls in the country. When Mayor Roberto Claudio was elected in 2013, he made tackling traffic congestion a priority with the launch of a Plan for Immediate Interventions on Transport and Traffic in Fortaleza (PAITT – Plano de Ações Imediatas em Trânsito e Transporte). The Plan called for a sustainable approach to mobility policies, emphasizing public transport, traffic safety measures, walking, and cycling infrastructures. By 2016, the annual monitoring system of traffic accidents revealed the lowest number of road traffic deaths in 15 years.

A Broader Context

For decades, transport planning in Brazil has focused on improving the conditions for automobiles at the expense of public transport, pedestrians, and cyclists. The automobile industry has been central to Brazil’s economy since the 1960s, shaping policies and incentives to own cars. Cities’ regulations were modified to accommodate private vehicles, increase road capacity and ensure parking spaces were available at both origin and destination. As a result, public transport ridership has decreased by over 25% in the last decade, while the automobile fleet has doubled.

The country has an exceptional regulatory framework for sustainable urban mobility. After decades of debate, in 2012, the National Urban Mobility Policy was adopted to reshape the direction of the country’s mobility plans and guide transport investments. This policy stresses public transport, walking, cycling, and more integration between transport and land use policies. In parallel, the Growth Acceleration Program (PAC) pledged over 150 billion BRL for transport infrastructure.

However, a recent assessment by the Ministry of Cities showed only 15 out of 329 transport projects contracted were finalized, due to lack of technical capacity. There is mounting pressure by society on the government to be more prompt and adept in their urban mobility planning. That includes dialogue with the population, project design, identification of sources of funding and financing, ensuring project quality throughout the execution and monitoring & evaluation frameworks.

While the rest of the country has put most investments on hold due to the political and economic crisis, Fortaleza shows resilience and the political will to advance sustainable mobility.

A recreation of a classic photo series showing the amount of space needed to transport the same number of people on bikes, transit, and cars. Photo: ITDP Brazil

A recreation of a classic photo series showing the amount of space needed to transport the same number of people on bikes, transit, and cars. Photo: ITDP Brazil

A recreation of a classic photo series showing the amount of space needed to transport the same number of people on bikes, transit, and cars. Photo: ITDP Brazil

Change Ahead

Learning from best practices implemented by progressive cities such as New York and Bogotá, the city has had an intense technical exchange with other cities and support from nongovernmental organizations. PAITT looks at short to medium term, low-cost transport solutions. The city also looked at strategies to encourage active transport, such as cycling and walking, and measures to lower the speed of vehicles–a crucial step to reduce the high numbers of road deaths.

Temporary interventions such as Cidade da Gente (People’s City) had demonstrated urban transformation is possible. As an example, the residential neighborhood of Cidade 2000 shifted road priority from vehicles to pedestrians by turning 1,200 square meters of parking space and traffic lanes into a pedestrian area.

The city has added over 111 km of bus lanes since 2013, with improved travel time for the 1,200 thousand trips a day. With the dedicated lanes, average bus speed increased from 4.4 to 13.5 km/h. The optimization of overlapping bus lines on the city’s main bus corridor resulted in saving 9.2 tons of CO2 per day. All 2,251 city buses have wifi, GPS, and air conditioning. Recently, seven terminals were refurbished including integration with Light Rail Train (LRT) and subway.

The cycle network has grown 350%, or 170 km, since 2013. In 2014, a Cycling Infrastructure Strategic Plan was delivered, with a total grid plan of 524 km. With a cycling policy in place, the government has tagged investments for the cycling infrastructure. In August this year, revenue from the digital Zona Azul, a new on-street parking regulation system, was secured to be reinvested into bike lanes. Annual bike counts conducted by the city have seen a 153% increase in the number of cyclists from 2012 to 2017.

The city has now four bicycle sharing systems. The main one, Bicicletar (operator Sertell and sponsor UNIMED), has 80 stations (with 6 trips per day per bike, it is one of the most used in Brazil). Bicicleta Integrada is a system specific for the last mile. Seven stations and 350 bicycles are located in the bus terminals. The system runs with an integrated public transport fare card—there is no need to have a credit card, and users can keep them for up to 14 hours with the bicycles (overnight)— which makes it accessible and equitable. One-third of users are women. Mini Bicicletar is a system with 50 bicycles located next to plazas, specifically for children, which is critical to encouraging toddlers and children using a bike for the first time. Finally, Bicicletar Corporativo was formed as a pilot project to test a model for the corporate sector. Currently, there are 6 stations and 14 bikes at City Hall for public officials to ride. They can take bikes overnight and keep them for up to 20 hours. 42% of Bicicletar Corporativo users are women and 40% are between 45 and 60 years old.

The sharing system has moved beyond bikes in Fortaleza. Vamo is the first public electric car sharing system in the country, with 16 stations and 20 vehicles. On-demand travel with electric vehicles and ride sharing, along with greater use of public transport, cycling, and walking is the roadmap to reduce car travel and change the future cities.

Public space is one of the most important elements for a dignifying citizenship experience. To counterbalance the car hegemony of today’s cities, we need to engage citizens and show them what can be done to enhance the public space.

In face of growing political conservatism and backward agendas, Fortaleza demonstrates that through creativity, innovation, and leadership it is possible to promote sustainable mobility. It gives us hope that political will combined with the capacity to prioritize and roll out mobility and people-friendly streets is not only the future we want – but a future we can deliver.

This article is from the 30th edition of the Sustainable Transport magazine.
Read the rest of the issue here.

In this vibrant issue of the Sustainable Transport magazine, we look forward to new leadership at ITDP, dive even deeper into the topic of women’s access to transit, explore progress and change in Fortaleza, learn about how transportation and early childhood development intersect, and much more!

The transportation sector is a major contributor to these twin problems of poor air quality and climate change. In a major polluted city like Beijing, vehicles are now the largest single contributor to ambient particulate matter, reaching 45 percent of total pollutants in 2017. Globally, transportation emission sources contribute up to 23% of average ozone exposure and 12% of average PM2.5 exposure. In 2010, the transport sector was responsible for 23 percent of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions. We can address these challenges in the near-term with a two-pronged strategy. First, we can initiate an immediate transition to the cleanest soot-free engines, while developing and implementing in parallel an operational shift to low-carbon, zero-emission, electric-drive engines.

More than 80% of all buses use older diesel engines and high sulfur fuel.

Bus fleets are the right place for cities to start the electric revolution. Buses already provide some of the absolute lowest carbon dioxide emissions per passenger-kilometer. Because more than 80 percent of all buses use older diesel engines and high sulfur fuel, the global bus fleet is responsible for an estimated 15 percent of all particulate matter emissions from on-road transportation. The International Association of Public Transport (UITP) has set a goal to double the market share of public transit by 2025 in support of international climate change targets. While this target is an effective low-carbon policy on its own, which will require a large increase in bus fleets, at a minimum, bus fleets need to quickly shift to soot-free diesel and gas engines to mitigate hazardous outdoor air pollution as investments in bus fleets expand. A better approach is to leapfrog vehicle technology by operating on zero-emission electric engines, which expand the climate mitigation potential of public transit, improve urban air quality, and increase the quality of public transit service.

Fortunately, bus fleets have operational characteristics that favor the introduction of new technologies, particularly electric drive engines, both to reduce risk and enable broader uptake throughout the rest of the fleet. Bus fleets are publicly regulated, they are centrally fueled, and they receive professional servicing and maintenance. Dedicated electric-drive engines are orders of magnitude more efficient than internal combustion diesel or gas engines.

While energy efficiency is paramount, electric buses also provide a better experience for the passenger, as their quiet motors offer a more pleasant ride over their noisy diesel counterparts. They also have fringe benefits for operators. With far lower maintenance costs, electric-drive buses have the potential to deliver lower costs over the lifetime of the vehicle, thus decreasing the costs of providing public transport service. But transit agencies need direct subsidies or changes to their financing models in order to cover the much higher upfront cost of transitioning their fleets to the electric buses. The specifics of that transition, meanwhile, mean that the large-scale leapfrog to zero-emission electric buses presents some questions for fleet operators.

Since BRT was born in Latin America in 1974 in Curitiba, Brazil, more than 20 systems have opened and are currently operating in Latin America, with key systems in Bogota and Quito now over 15 years old. Much of the focus on BRT, from advocates to planners and engineers to politicians, has traditionally been on planning and designing the BRT corridor just to reach the “ribbon-cutting” phase with little thought to sustaining operations afterwards. Cities and system operators often struggle with maintaining high-quality operations and integration in order to continue to attract ridership.

To address these issues with the region that has the most experience with BRT, ITDP convened a group of practitioners and decision makers to discuss the state of BRT from October 31- November 1, 2018 in Mexico City. This experience-sharing workshop was supported by the Transformative Urban Mobility Initiative (TUMI) and the German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). The workshop aimed to discover common operational problems and disseminate better BRT operation strategies that can be expanded or replicated into other systems, including in other regions such as Asia and Africa. In order to enrich the dialogue, experts and partners from WRI Brazil, WRI Mexico, BRT Center of Excellence, and 100 Resilient Cities were also invited and presented case studies, summing a total of 30 participants.

Participants at the Latin-American Experience-Sharing Workshop on BRT and Bus-Based Systems

Photos of BRT systems of cities that participated in the activity

Cities that have participated in the activity

The workshop was based on the presentation of twelve case studies by eleven different cities from six Latin American countries:

México City and Puebla from México

Belo Horizonte, Fortaleza, Rio de Janeiro, and São Paulo from Brazil

Santiago from Chile

Barranquilla and Bogotá from Colombia

Quito from Ecuador

Guatemala City from Guatemala

From the 12 studies, ITDP selected the cases that responded the most to the systems’ main challenges and populated the responses in the graphs seen below:

Most relevant BRT and bus-based systems challenges according to a survey conducted with over 20 Latin-American managers
(click to enlarge)

Strategies presented included solutions for operations funding, institutional integration, fare evasion, frequent bus network design, regularity on both trunk and feeder lines, and tactical interventions for improved access among others. Service regularity was the most recurring technical topic mentioned in the discussions. According to participants and experts, offering rapid services on trunk routes is not enough. Especially as new and competing transport modes arise, it is imperative that users are confident that service will be consistent from starting point to destination. This need imposes a special challenge for trunk and feeder systems and routes that run in mixed-traffic.

A few Latin American cities are implementing strategies to combat this problem. Bogotá’s TransMilenio is working on improving the precision of inter-corridor routes’ cycle time through the use of statistical methods, while Belo Horizonte has recently deployed simple measures such as shifting feeder routes’ control points from the neighborhoods to the terminals to guarantee on schedule departure times from terminals during peak times. São Paulo has implemented continuous operational procedures that give more control to the transit agencies instead of private operators, including advance knowledge of which bus and driver are assigned to specific routes. The BRT Centre of Excellence is testing new technologies in Santiago (and Sweden) that should make it easier for drivers to know whether they should go faster or slower in order to keep route service punctual and consistent.

Reliable service is one of the most important factors in gaining ridership and innovative and holistic approaches are necessary to achieve reliable service. However, these approaches do not always involve new technology. The city of Barranquilla invested in a culture strengthening program that allocated staff to system stations. The staff provided educational information for the users regarding fare media usage, respecting the system preferential seats, and queueing in stations. The program used this educational approach instead of simply enforcing and fining bad behavior, resulting in reduced fare evasion and vandalism to the system. Guatemala converted important streets near the BRT main stations into pedestrian-only, improving access, facilitating commercial activities and services to flourish and improve security. Learning from the implementation of the first Metrobus, Mexico City started to implement a series of improvements for pedestrian access to new corridor stations. During the workshop, participants visited the thriving areas around Metrobus lines 3 and 4 in downtown Mexico City.

The road to reliable, seamlessly integrated and attractive BRT and bus-based systems is complex and multidisciplinary. The convening of high-level BRT and bus system managers from key Latin-American cities where these systems are more mature represents a unique opportunity to improve operational strategies to increase the longevity of the BRT systems. With participants’ know-how, specially tailored peer exchanges, and international experts’ inputs, the workshop allowed decision makers to increase their ability to advance on their own technical and governance issues. At the same time, conclusions distilled from the discussions will also prove beneficial to systems operating in other world regions in subsequent years. The workshop was a small but important step on the road to global BRT system transformation that highlighted the necessity to continue the development of spaces for dialogue between different entities involved in the planning, implementing, and operating public transport systems to guarantee the development of more sustainable and inclusive cities and metropolitan regions around the world.

The last installment of the BRT Planning Guide Webinar series will present key recommendations for ITS design for BRT Operations for transport officials and public administrations. With the integration of “smart city” technologies in BRT systems, our hosts will discuss fleet monitoring and bus management systems, fare collection, and user information. Lastly, they will review the critical phase of tendering, contract management, implementation, operation, and long-term maintenance and exploitation.

About the Presenters

Giorgio Ambrosino | Director of MemEx

Giorgio Ambrosino is the Director of MemEx, an independent engineering company specialised in Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS), Urban Passenger Transport, Integrated Mobility Services, City Logistics and Smart City supporting a large number of European, Regional and Local Authorities and Transport Executives. For over 30 years Giorgio has been involved in planning, design, implementation, operation and evaluation of wide number of projects like, among the others: Real Time Passenger Information Systems, Bus fleet control and monitoring, Integrated Ticketing system, Shared mobility platform, Access control and Parking systems, etc. As technical coordinator, Giorgio has participated in several European projects funded by R&D programmes and Regional Cooperation Initiatives. Giorgio is author of numerous technical papers and co-editor of different books on the above aspects.

Saverio Gini | Senior Project Manager, MemEx

Saverio Gini is a Senior Project Manager at MemEx. His expertise in the ITS sector includes electronic ticketing and the definition of innovative solutions and services for public transport and mobility (i.e. AVM, infosystems, etc.). His activity concerns the definition of user needs, management of the public tender and/or contracting of supply, testing and support in system’s deployment and launching. He is involved in the MemEx R&D activities and in international cooperation programmes (VII FP, PSP-ICT, Interreg, H2020). He is currently responsible of ITS supporting action to CIVITAS Destinations sites and responsible of Toolbox design in H2020 CIPTEC project.

Small, personally-operated mobility options, like bikes and scooters, have highlighted a growing demand in urban areas for convenient, inexpensive alternatives to cars. However, following two high profile fatal crashes involving e-scooters and vehicles in Dallas and Washington, DC, media coverage (and the public) has been heavily focused on the safety of these two-wheelers. Some have even characterized injuries associated with the popularity of scooters as a “public safety crisis”, and a lawsuit was filed on behalf of pedestrians injured by scooters in California, suing scooter companies for negligence. Some cities have moved to restrict maximum scooter speeds, like Washington, DC, which just recently limited speeds to 10 miles per hour.

Bird scooter rider in Washington DC

This is an overreaction that neglects putting scooter safety into perspective. Riding an e-scooter does carry some level of risk, but those risks pale in comparison to those associated with driving a car, or sharing the streets with cars. Despite the increases we’ve seen in cycling, walking, and scooters in many North American cities, the majority of urban roads are designed for vehicles often traveling at high speeds. Road crashes are the leading cause of death among 15-29 year olds worldwide, resulting in over 3,000 deaths on average per day. Until we have streets designed for all modes that actually use them: bikes, scooters, buses, pedestrians, and cars, high numbers of crashes and fatalities will continue to be the norm. Like cyclists, scooter users are often forced to ride in traffic alongside cars or on the sidewalk alongside pedestrians. In fact, capping speeds such as DC has done may actually make scooter riding less safe, since scooters won’t be able to keep pace with cyclists, and will likely be forced out of bike lanes and onto sidewalks where they intrude on pedestrian space.

The Rapid Rise of E-Scooters

Since their launch in late 2017, dockless electric “kick” scooters have sparked a range of public responses from nostalgic glee, to concerns for safety, to outright hatred. After raising significant venture capital funding, Bird was the first electric scooter company to launch and, over the next few months, several existing dockless bikeshare companies began to pivot their business models to focus primarily on e-scooters. At least a half dozen other e-scooter companies emerged during this time.

Uptake of e-scooters in the US happened fast, generating a 3.6% adoption rate (the percentage of people who have tried the service) in less than 12 months, compared to docked bikeshare schemes, which show a 13% adoption rate after eight years. Compared to dockless bikes (excluding pedal assist offerings), dockless scooters have generated, on average, significantly more total trips, as shown in the chart below, and more trips per vehicle per day.

Despite e-scooter companies modeling their business after bikeshare, these trip numbers make the economics of e-scooter operation more viable than dockless bikes, with each scooter paying for itself in a matter of weeks (4-8 by some estimates) instead of months. At this level of return, investors are keenly interested in the success of scooters, and continue to pump billions of dollars of funding into the industry. In fact, after less than one year of operations, Bird became the fastest company ever to reach a valuation of $1 billion (known in the venture capital world as a “unicorn”) – faster than Uber, Facebook, Twitter and other tech giants. Concerns abound, however, about the long-term sustainability (from a profit perspective) of the private scootershare and bikeshare business models, particularly when maintenance, charging, rebalancing and other operating costs associated with high-quality service are taken into account.

By the later half of 2018, scooter companies began eyeing markets outside of the US. Lime operates in six European cities, two cities in New Zealand, and launched in Mexico City in October. A Mexican scooter company, Grin, also provides service in Mexico City. Bird operates in six European cities including London, Madrid and Paris, as well as in Israel.

Investing in infrastructure that protects scooter and cyclists is key to supporting and growing these car alternatives, as is clearly communicating to users safe riding behavior and where scooters are and are not permitted to be ridden. Recognizing that most streets, in their current car-centric form, are inherently unsafe for non-car users, cities must commit to street design that is inclusive and safe for all modes, and they must commit to enforcing these rules. Bike lanes are only useful if you can actually bike in them without the obstacles of parked cars, delivery trucks, and even pedestrians.

Whether you think e-scooters are the best or the worst thing to ever happen to cities, their popularity demonstrates how great the need is for diverse transport options that serve all types of trips. People want to get around cities in ways other than a private car, and city governments should do everything they can to make those options convenient, safe, and connected to each other.

ITDP has been working to reform parking policies worldwide for over a decade as a way to shift cities toward sustainable transport. In July 2017, Mexico City Mayor Miguel Ángel Mancera announced changes in the construction code that would curtail the development of further off-street parking development. The new norm changes minimum parking requirements to maximums and puts Mexico City, the largest city in North America, far ahead of other cities in its commitment to prioritizing people over cars.

This major policy change is a result of ITDP Mexico’s advocacy over the last 10 years, when the team began working with government agencies to develop alternatives to the private car, as well as mechanisms to reduce its use. With the support of the Ministry of Urban Development and Housing (SEDUVI), the research study “Less Parking, More City,” provided enough evidence to show unsustainable trends of constructing buildings for cars, ultimately sending people to live in the periphery. We illustrated the 10 year journey in our new interactive timeline.

We are pleased to announce the appointment of Heather Thompson as our new chief executive officer. Ms. Thompson, who has been serving in the role of interim CEO since February, was selected by the ITDP board of directors after an extensive, international search. Her transition to permanent CEO is ongoing, and will be effective October 15.

In selecting Ms. Thompson for the role, board members highlighted her experience as a highly effective manager of people and programs in international cities, and her strong track record in environmental issues. In her new role at ITDP, she will be integrating ITDP’s environmental drive with efforts to create cities that are also economically and socially sustainable. This will enhance ITDP’s strengths of working collaboratively in different contexts, turning the challenges of rapid urbanization into opportunities to build more environmentally, economically, and socially inclusive cities.

“I could not be happier that Heather is stepping up to become CEO. Having served as board chair and interim-CEO, she understands how to ensure ITDP delivers on its ambitious, important mission,” says Joseph Ryan, Acting Chair of the ITDP board, and Executive VP of Securing America’s Future Energy, “We have a leader who is worthy of this role, and ready to deliver tangible results that will benefit people living in cities all around the world.”

Heather Thompson brings decades of experience in the environmental non-profit sector to ITDP. Most recently, she has been advising clients, including the Asian Development Bank, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Environmental Defense Fund, in designing strategies that will have a large-scale impact. Ms. Thompson has been involved with ITDP for many years, initially as co-founder and Vice President of programs for ClimateWorks. Ms. Thompson has sat on the ITDP board of directors for the last eight years, serving as board chair for the last two years. She holds a MSc in environmental economics from the University of York, U.K. and a B.S. in biological sciences from the University of California, San Diego.

“I am honored to join ITDP’s esteemed international team and build on such a rich history of achievements,” said Thompson. “ITDP’s work with cities around the world shows us that bold progress can be made toward more walkable, bike-friendly, transit-accessible cities. The need couldn’t be greater as cities around the world are booming. I am excited to be joining an organization that can truly deliver tangible improvements on the ground in cities around the world. Our challenge is to take advantage of all the opportunities we have to move our world forward towards more equitable, livable, environmentally friendly ways.”

For 30 years, ITDP has worked for sustainable, equitable solutions to combat climate change and promote active transport and healthy urban environments.

Check out some of our resources below, and follow us @ITDP_HQ for updates on our work.

3 Revolutions in Urban Transportation: Automation, electrification, and sharing are three big changes on the horizon for transportation and have the potential to help or hinder us in obtaining our climate goals. This paper looks ahead to 2050 to see how the world could fulfill its climate commitments in the context of these three changes. The findings show that the only way to achieve our climate goals is by pursuing both sharing strategies grounded in transit and compact land use, and electrification strategies. Neither strategy by itself will get us there.

The TOD Standard: Transportation emissions are on the rise, due to increasing sprawl and efficient transportation. To reduce emissions, we must move towards more compact cities, that are developed around transportation. Our TOD Standard and Infographic are designed to help city leaders understand and prioritize the building blocks for developing sustainable, transit-oriented cities.

A Global High Shift Cycling Scenario: Cycling, rather than driving, can help dramatically reduce transportation emissions. This report shows that by shifting from 7% mode share in cycling globally to a more reasonable 23%, we can save 300 megatonnes of CO2e and 25 trillion USD by 2050. To do that, cities should develop a strategy for increasing cycling mode share by lowering barriers to cycling and creating safer cycling environments. Here are some tools to help cities improve their cycle mode share:

People Near Transit: Improving Accessibility and Rapid Transit Coverage in Large Cities: To reduce emissions, we must ensure that mass rapid transit is accessible to all, and is the norm for transportation rather than single passenger vehicles. Essentially cities need to maximize the number of people near transit. This report outlines a simple metric, “People Near Transit”, which can be used to access the quality of the coverage of rapid transit for a city’s population. PNT can be used by cities to set targets and measure their progress in creating inclusive transit-oriented development.

Best Practice in National Support for Urban Transportation Paper SeriesCities can play an important role to mitigate climate change by investing in more sustainable urban transportation systems. Some nations have done better than others to invest in sustainable transport in their cities, offering lessons for the future. Part 1 of this series provides a comparative analysis of rapid transit infrastructure in nine countries that are major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, and Part 2: Growing Rapid Transit Infrastructure: Funding, Financing, examines the conditions that allowed for rapid growth in rapid transit per resident. The series concludes with recommendations related to cities’ ability to invest more in improved urban transport when they have control of funding, technical capacity, and legal authority, as seen in this infographic.

We use cookies for analytics and to improve our site. You agree to the use of our cookies by closing this message box or continuing to use our site. To find out more, see our updated Privacy Policy. Accept